5 ms·

The market has spoken loud and clear since 2010, when Androids bigger than iPhone became popular. iPhone dragged it's feet till 2013/2014 because they didn't wa

by 21 8y ago

The market has spoken loud and clear since 2010, when Androids bigger than iPhone became popular. iPhone dragged it's feet till 2013/2014 because they didn't want to appear conceding that they were wrong, but eventually they had to buckle.

untog 8y ago
There haven't really been many attempts at making small flagship-quality devices in years. Didn't the SE immediately sell out when it was released? I struggle to believe no similar market exists today, but Apple obviously has a easier and more profitable path maintaining the device collection they announced today. I just wish they didn't. I was thinking about replacing my SE with whatever was announced today, but instead I'll be continuing to use it until it dies/isn't supported any more. Maybe I'm alone on that, I dunno.
- kgwgk 8y ago
  You’re not alone! I think I may replace my aging SE with a new SE. Edit: I was wondering if an Apple Watch / iPod Touch combo could be an option but it seems they don’t play well together.
  - giobox 8y ago
    I wonder how much of a factor size was in SE sales; of course some customers clearly chose it with size a primary concern, but I suspect many more bought it because it was a good phone at an attractively low price. The iPhone 7 still carries the flag for price conscious customers today, even if it is more expensive. The SE was a very unusually strong low end value proposition by Apple standards at 349 dollars for the 32GB handset, and I suspect this _much_ more than size mattered. Cheap small sized Android handsets have never really sold in remotely meaningful numbers in recent years (and Sony made some resonably solid designs), which gives me further pause as to how well "small" as primary feature sells now. It is definitely a shame for those who did value the SE for its size, but iPhones are unabashedly mass-market devices, and for better or worse bigger appears to sell. I do think an imaginary SE design with the full size screen design of the X with FaceID etc would be a gorgeous looking little device though...
- notatoad 8y ago
  "selling out" doesn't mean anything without an actual quantity number. It doesn't even mean apple underestimated demand, because they could have intentionally understocked to get the "iPhone SE sells out in minutes" headlines. The best clue that the small phone market is actually a small market is to look to android: the smaller phones don't sell particularly well, especially in the premium tiers. The only company really making a go at the small phones is sony, and they're basically failing.
- SiVal 8y ago
  Big phones fit in my pockets and in my wife's purse, but not in my kid's pockets. He chose the SE, because it fit his pockets. He's still growing, so we'll probably be able to postpone getting him a new phone until he's bigger, but it seems an odd choice for Apple to eliminate the most kid-friendly size. I would think that bringing more kids into the controlled theme park that is iOS would matter more than the margins on this particular device, but I guess Apple moves in mysterious ways.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
- wmeredith 8y ago
  > Didn't the SE immediately sell out when it was released? Pretty sure no one in this thread knows more about SE sales than the product people at Apple making these decisions.
- komali2 8y ago
  Right, I get this feeling that there's a boardroom of execs out there saying "well, the Samsung Note sold a whole lot of devices, clearly the reason is because it's big!" Then the release a bunch of only-big iphones, which sell more than the previous generation of iphones, and they go "Aha! We're on to something here!" Like, there's a ton of reasons that sales of a new gen of iphone could be higher than previous, or that the note sold more than some other iphone model, etc, without having anything to do with physical size of the device. I for one am absolutely desperate for a galaxy s1 sized device with a headphone jack, long battery life, and reasonable performance, regardless of thickness. I would probably pay 800 dollars for such a device. It's just me here and now but judging from other comments I've seen I bet I'm not alone.
  - svachalek 8y ago
    Well, there's 4 generations of phones now that came in two sizes (6, 6S, 7, 8) so I would assume they've got a little more to go on than Samsung's quarterlies.
  - heartbreak 8y ago
    You think that product demand is only conducted by putting a product on the market and seeing how well it sells? And you're posting on HN? Sorry for the snark but damn this trope was stale 4 years ago. Apple has more than enough money to throw at researching whether or not it's worth it to make a particular size phone without first producing said phone.
    - komali2 8y ago
      If you knew the top part was snarky, and snarky enough to justify apologizing for, why didn't you just save you the time of writing it and me the time of reading it and thinking "gee thanks asshole"? Nope, I don't work at Apple, I have no idea how they do market research. They sure do know how to make money, though.
- lowlevel 8y ago
  Yes, they were stock constrained for many months.. infact, I tried to buy one 3 months ago, and they didn't have any in the store. I think they just didn't want to make them...
scarface74 8y ago
Apple wouldn't leave money on the table in an effort to save face. It came out in the Apple vs. Samsung lawsuits that they were caught flat footed. From a technical standpoint, they could have released larger phones before they did. What stopped them is that UIKit and iOS apps were not designed to handle multiple screen sizes or any screen except for the 4 inch iPhone and the 9.7" iPad until iOS 7 and support improved in IOS 8.
- jodrellblank 8y ago
  From a technical standpoint they could, but they didn't because their technology wasn't ready? So .. they couldn't?
  - scarface74 8y ago
    Hardware - they could release bigger phones. Software - they didn’t have the framework to allow for it. It would have been like all of the Android phones that copied the notch before the OS was ready.
ethbro 8y ago
If you want to push margins, larger devices selling for higher absolute prices are a better option. Imho, it's harder to convince people a "smartphone" is worth USD $1k+. But a laptop / tablet replacement? That's reasonable(!) compared to a MBP... Given Apple's build costs don't scale with device size (++screen, +battery, +gpu/mem), selling the same internals in bigger devices for more is a win. So you continue expanding device size and price until you discover the market boundaries. And unlike Samsung S*/Note, Apple has the ability to say "These are the only form factors this generation, if you want the newest iPhone..."
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- ken 8y ago
  > Given Apple's build costs don't scale with device size (++screen, +battery, +gpu/mem), selling the same internals in bigger devices for more is a win. Only if those customers buy the bigger device, and if smaller phones require the latest internals. If these people stick with their older/smaller devices, you've lost a sale. If you can get away with 2-year-old internals in these smaller phones, it could be much cheaper to produce than the latest flagship. I don't know what Apple's margins are on these devices, but a couple months ago AT&T was offering the current (final) iPhone SE for $50. > Apple has the ability to say "These are the only form factors this generation, if you want the newest iPhone..." True, but the SE was never about appealing to users who wanted the newest iPhone.

by 21 8y ago

untog 8y ago

There haven't really been many attempts at making small flagship-quality devices in years. Didn't the SE immediately sell out when it was released? I struggle to believe no similar market exists today, but Apple obviously has a easier and more profitable path maintaining the device collection they announced today. I just wish they didn't. I was thinking about replacing my SE with whatever was announced today, but instead I'll be continuing to use it until it dies/isn't supported any more. Maybe I'm alone on that, I dunno.

kgwgk 8y ago
You’re not alone! I think I may replace my aging SE with a new SE. Edit: I was wondering if an Apple Watch / iPod Touch combo could be an option but it seems they don’t play well together.
- giobox 8y ago
  I wonder how much of a factor size was in SE sales; of course some customers clearly chose it with size a primary concern, but I suspect many more bought it because it was a good phone at an attractively low price. The iPhone 7 still carries the flag for price conscious customers today, even if it is more expensive. The SE was a very unusually strong low end value proposition by Apple standards at 349 dollars for the 32GB handset, and I suspect this _much_ more than size mattered. Cheap small sized Android handsets have never really sold in remotely meaningful numbers in recent years (and Sony made some resonably solid designs), which gives me further pause as to how well "small" as primary feature sells now. It is definitely a shame for those who did value the SE for its size, but iPhones are unabashedly mass-market devices, and for better or worse bigger appears to sell. I do think an imaginary SE design with the full size screen design of the X with FaceID etc would be a gorgeous looking little device though...
notatoad 8y ago
"selling out" doesn't mean anything without an actual quantity number. It doesn't even mean apple underestimated demand, because they could have intentionally understocked to get the "iPhone SE sells out in minutes" headlines. The best clue that the small phone market is actually a small market is to look to android: the smaller phones don't sell particularly well, especially in the premium tiers. The only company really making a go at the small phones is sony, and they're basically failing.
SiVal 8y ago
Big phones fit in my pockets and in my wife's purse, but not in my kid's pockets. He chose the SE, because it fit his pockets. He's still growing, so we'll probably be able to postpone getting him a new phone until he's bigger, but it seems an odd choice for Apple to eliminate the most kid-friendly size. I would think that bringing more kids into the controlled theme park that is iOS would matter more than the margins on this particular device, but I guess Apple moves in mysterious ways.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
wmeredith 8y ago
> Didn't the SE immediately sell out when it was released? Pretty sure no one in this thread knows more about SE sales than the product people at Apple making these decisions.
komali2 8y ago
Right, I get this feeling that there's a boardroom of execs out there saying "well, the Samsung Note sold a whole lot of devices, clearly the reason is because it's big!" Then the release a bunch of only-big iphones, which sell more than the previous generation of iphones, and they go "Aha! We're on to something here!" Like, there's a ton of reasons that sales of a new gen of iphone could be higher than previous, or that the note sold more than some other iphone model, etc, without having anything to do with physical size of the device. I for one am absolutely desperate for a galaxy s1 sized device with a headphone jack, long battery life, and reasonable performance, regardless of thickness. I would probably pay 800 dollars for such a device. It's just me here and now but judging from other comments I've seen I bet I'm not alone.
- svachalek 8y ago
  Well, there's 4 generations of phones now that came in two sizes (6, 6S, 7, 8) so I would assume they've got a little more to go on than Samsung's quarterlies.
- heartbreak 8y ago
  You think that product demand is only conducted by putting a product on the market and seeing how well it sells? And you're posting on HN? Sorry for the snark but damn this trope was stale 4 years ago. Apple has more than enough money to throw at researching whether or not it's worth it to make a particular size phone without first producing said phone.
  - komali2 8y ago
    If you knew the top part was snarky, and snarky enough to justify apologizing for, why didn't you just save you the time of writing it and me the time of reading it and thinking "gee thanks asshole"? Nope, I don't work at Apple, I have no idea how they do market research. They sure do know how to make money, though.
lowlevel 8y ago
Yes, they were stock constrained for many months.. infact, I tried to buy one 3 months ago, and they didn't have any in the store. I think they just didn't want to make them...

scarface74 8y ago

Apple wouldn't leave money on the table in an effort to save face. It came out in the Apple vs. Samsung lawsuits that they were caught flat footed. From a technical standpoint, they could have released larger phones before they did. What stopped them is that UIKit and iOS apps were not designed to handle multiple screen sizes or any screen except for the 4 inch iPhone and the 9.7" iPad until iOS 7 and support improved in IOS 8.

jodrellblank 8y ago
From a technical standpoint they could, but they didn't because their technology wasn't ready? So .. they couldn't?
- scarface74 8y ago
  Hardware - they could release bigger phones. Software - they didn’t have the framework to allow for it. It would have been like all of the Android phones that copied the notch before the OS was ready.

ethbro 8y ago

If you want to push margins, larger devices selling for higher absolute prices are a better option. Imho, it's harder to convince people a "smartphone" is worth USD $1k+. But a laptop / tablet replacement? That's reasonable(!) compared to a MBP... Given Apple's build costs don't scale with device size (++screen, +battery, +gpu/mem), selling the same internals in bigger devices for more is a win. So you continue expanding device size and price until you discover the market boundaries. And unlike Samsung S*/Note, Apple has the ability to say "These are the only form factors this generation, if you want the newest iPhone..."

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
ken 8y ago
> Given Apple's build costs don't scale with device size (++screen, +battery, +gpu/mem), selling the same internals in bigger devices for more is a win. Only if those customers buy the bigger device, and if smaller phones require the latest internals. If these people stick with their older/smaller devices, you've lost a sale. If you can get away with 2-year-old internals in these smaller phones, it could be much cheaper to produce than the latest flagship. I don't know what Apple's margins are on these devices, but a couple months ago AT&T was offering the current (final) iPhone SE for $50. > Apple has the ability to say "These are the only form factors this generation, if you want the newest iPhone..." True, but the SE was never about appealing to users who wanted the newest iPhone.